I believe that Portofino was the one book in the Calvin trilogy that was biographical. So you read the latest book? I haven't as yet, but I am assuming that is was very much like Portofino. Frank, if you are reading these, please weigh in on the Portofino vs. Crazy for God question? Are they basically the same with different names attached? I have a friend who wants me to ask you WHY you felt the need to be brutally honest in Crazy For God as opposed to allowing people to have their own "icons" to aspire to. Not that they(your family) should be worshipped per see.... but it is true that young people need to have
something other than broken down families to give them hope. Are you removing that from them? I have yet to read the book, so i'll suspend judgement until I read it. Arden
Do you have personal experience with evangelicals? As many as Frank? I would assume that Frank is in fact quite the position to express honest opinions about people he spent a good portion of his life with. And he ridicules everyone's appearance in the book, not just the evangelicals.
Plus, Frank is the author here, if he didn't spend his time telling anecdotal stories, there would be no book in the first place.
And I see you note he ridicules everyones appearance...that makes it all right? He is expressing intolerance and prejudice as bad as any of the "yokels", who he obviously despised, that he dealt with. Real "open minded" of him.
And sure he can tell anecdotal stories...just don't confuse them with evidence.
But his conclusions are the real factor here.
After all this, after all his experience, he says, in his last paragraph, "maybe there is a God", "Who knows."
Um, he's an author, that's his job. To make a few bucks. He never professes that he's writing this book to clear the air about what evangelicals are really like, nor does he ever claim that all of his anecdotes are fact, he simply says that they are as he remembers them, which is all you can ever ask of a memoir. He never states that he is without fault, and he portrays himself as a jokester, a sarcastic person who makes fun of other people as well as himself - that's who he is and he doesn't pretend to be otherwise. Nor does he claim to be open minded, so faulting him for not being open minded is - well, pretty closed minded of you. If you think that the personas of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, et al are solely to propagate the word of God, and not to also "make a few bucks" as you fault Frank for doing, then you are sorely delusional, I'm sorry to say.
But in fact his whole approach is to claim he is telling what evangelicals are really like! In the promos for his book he laments how he helped built the relgious right and how he is now taking it back...if he is not telling what they are really like, and telling the truth in doing so, then how is he taking it back?
To say thay he does not claim his anecdotes are fact is evasive...if they are simply as he remembers them but they are not fact does that mean he is delusional? Or perhaps troubled by false memories? Who knows?
And yeah, the person you describe as a joksester, sarcasitic, and making fun of other people kind of sounds like a jerk.
Who needs it? Do you know where I could get a refund?
Note that Matthew Markovich in his review states, "Frank's life as Greek Orthodox is out there on cd's and dvd's for all to find out about so no need to dwell on it in this book..."
I wondered about that as well. Why would this be? He's been "orthodox" supposedly since 1989. I'll tell you why, as D. Christensen points out, the last paragraph of this CRAZY book gives the answer as Schaeffer says, "So maybe there is a God who forgives, who loves, who knows. I hope so"
This shows Frank(y) is really a full blown AGNOSTIC so no wonder he doesn't mention his life transforming Orthodox conversion. He's retracted it or more accurately, it never really happened. He hawks religious wares at a storefront called Regina Orthodox Press that include DVD's of his reason for "converting." However, no real Orthodox or Catholic, or Evangelical for that matter says "maybe there is a God" for without faith, it is impossible to please him.
He also wore himself out on selective anecdotal accounts bashing everything evangelical.
Schaeffer is a very little man. I'm not sure he even finished high school. His parents were intellectual titans and he resented them for it because he was too lazy to achieve what they did. He keeps reminding people of Dr. Schaeffer's simple, blue collar background to try to pull his dad down to his own modest level...as a leveling kind of therapy.
Frank(y) only attacks things he doesn't like, then occasionally throws in peace-type language about how life is full of variety. Judging from many of his books which I have read all the way back to "Addicted to Mediocrity" "Sham Pearls for Real Swine" "Myth of Neutrality", the "Christian Activist - Los Gatos verson" "Dancing Alone" Calvin Becker, and now this outrageous diatribe, he is a mean, vindictive, bitter, agnostic/atheist, suffering from a HUGE identity crisis trapped in a child ego state. He upheaves a book every once in a while by pressing his temples and going through a mental masturbation exercise flinging particulars around and painting a universe that he understands only at that moment in time.
Francis A. Schaeffer is to Franky what Hezekiah is to Manassah...it is a situation of having one child too many.
Amazing how much vitriol is released when one of the "true believers" leaves the fold. Congrats to Franky on his liberation. Would that the rest of the myopic evangelistic community would come to its senses and realize that valid and equal points of view exist outside of the Judeo-Christian tradition.
It's interesting, your comment on Christianity being the sole source of truth is reminiscent of the way fundamental muslims describe the koran and the tenets of Islam. It seems that in most religions there are sects or individuals that need the security of declaring their beliefs the only true ones. Nevertheless, God hears prayers regardless of what name we use. Peace be with you Brother.
You leave off the last sentence of the paragraph (typical Protestant, quoting verses out of context).
"Perhaps Mom and Dad were right. in an infinite universe, everything must have happened at least once, someplace, sometime. So maybe there is a God who forgives, who loves, who knows. I hope so. Anything is possible in a world where a daughter forgives her father, for ignorance, for anger, for failure, and places her daughter in his arms".
He is speaking about his own daughter, and his granddaughter, and how his daughter has had to forgive him for all the bad he did to her. And he is also speaking about his own father and mother, and their relationship, and his forgiveness of their mistakes. He is also recognizing himself in his father, and demonstrating a respect and empathy a great theologian like Francis Shaeffer deserves from his son.
You are giving "atheists" a lot of credit, for writing a beautiful paragraph like that.
Oh, and by the way, by Christian do you mean Orthodox, Catholics, and Gnostics as well as Protestants? LOL...somehow I think not...you mean your particular brand of Christianity is true, and all the other brands are false. Well, join the crowd....
I beg to differ: there's nothing "pathetic" about someone who helped bring about a certain state of affairs "whine" about it. I'd object to the verb "whine." Perhaps he "laments" that he brought about a certain state of affairs. And there's nothing "pathetic" about that except in the fact that it shows some degree of compassion for others--a quality in which the religious right is extremely lacking. Mr. Schaeffer is merely seeing the error of his ways and repenting, which is good Christian practice.
If you make up the definitions of words, it makes it very difficult to communicate with others. The term "Protestant Fundamentalist" comes from a famous book called "The Fundamentals of Christianity", published around 1909.
From Wikipedia: "The volumes defended Orthodox Protestant beliefs and attacked higher criticism, liberal theology, Catholicism (also called by them Romanism), socialism, modern philosophy, atheism, Christian Science, Mormonism, Spiritualism, and evolutionism (an article by geologist George Frederick Wright)."
I have a feeling that there is NOTHING in that book that you would disagree with, at least in principle. If you even know what higher criticism is. There is little in this book that I agree with. Ergo, you are a Protestant Fundamentalist and I am not. Should be pretty clear to you if you do even the most basic research. I would also suggest doing some research on Islamic Fundamentalism, and hope that you notice the very scary corollaries.
Here is what is pathetic about Franky. The only time in his life when he was really in the limelight was when he was making money in his father's shadow. He knew all the top guns in evangelical Christianity, had big-selling books, and was a prominent speaker. When he chucked all that, he was left with life as a mediocre filmmaker, and a modestly successful novelist. After over 20 years, he is still stuck there. If he had truly put his evangelical days behind him, he would be doing something new and relevant. Instead, he has made an industry out of publishing books and articles that trash his family and upbringing. Do you read his blogs on Huffington Post? Hardly one goes by where he doesn't remind everyone that he used to be a prominent evangelical, or that his parents were best-selling authors,etc. His whole identity is still wrapped up in the part of his life that he now repudiates. Franky needs some serious therapy so he can do something positive with his talents in his middle age and senior citizenhood. He is still the cranky little boy in CRAZY FOR GOD who can't resist doing something he knows his parents won't like.
I don't know if you noticed, but the last three books Frank put out all had to do with being a military father. "Baby Jack", "Keeping Faith", and "Faith of our Sons" have NOTHING to do with the Religious Right! They have all gotten very favorable reviews, and I'm sure he's made a very decent living off of the sales.
Like him or not, he is a good writer; he knows how to put words together.
Yes, I'm aware of those books, even though I have not read them. Elsewhere I have written about FS that I think part of his frustration is a lack of significant personal identity after he abandoned his career as a religious right filmmaker. His early works all depended on his father; his latest books depend on his son, or on distancing himself from his father. (Franky's own work inbetween the two periods consisted of making awful Hollywood B-pictures.) His current blogs can't even get away from frequent mentions of his history in the religious right. I'd love to see a book by FS that doesn't depend on another member of his family for significance.
Sir, with all due respect, you are a moron. It's popular to advise young writers with the following: "write what you know." Clearly Frank's family, from his parents to his grandchildren, have been massively influential in his life and he has pondered said influence a great deal. Why should he avoid talking about them... simply because you don't care for the topic? His writing "depends on another member of his family for significance" because these are the topics he is choosing to write about and these are the topics that he "knows". If he wanted to write a cooking book I'm sure he could. If you want to read fictional crap, there's plenty of trash fiction (including the religious kind) around for you to choose from. I don't understand why you bother to read and comment about a writer whose autobiographical and self-reflective work you apparently do not give a damn about.
You show no "due respect," and you don't know enough about me to call me a moron, a lover of trash fiction, or anything else for that matter. I have followed Franky's career for over 30 years, worked on one of his film projects, and read many of his early books, which you may not have even heard of (he seldom acknowledges them these days). I wrote my comments because I DO care about his writings. If you bother to read his HuffPost blogs, you will start to understand how stuck he is in the past, and how desperate he is for personal significance. Unfortunately, he earned that significance doing something he now regrets. I would love to read a book someday by his analyst. Now THAT would be interesting reading.